Advertisement

Recent Theories Concerning the Nature and Role of Interest

  • G. L. S. Shackle

Abstract

The place of interest rates in the economic process has since 1945 been mainly discussed, within the literature in English, along three lines: first, criticism and defence of Keynes’s position; secondly, advocacy of a stock or of a flow analysis, or of the need to combine them; thirdly, examination of the claim of interest to be a suitable and effective regulator of the pace of growth of the nation’s wealth. The following survey tries to explain and criticise this debate and to interject some suggestions into it, without aiming at more than an illustrative coverage of the literature. It is earnestly hoped that the absence of a name from this article will not be taken to imply any judgment on the value and importance of any person’s work.

Keywords

Interest Rate Excess Demand Bond Price Money Stock Money Balance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    John Maynard, Lord Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (London: Macmillan, 1936).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Don Patinkin, Money, Interest and Prices (Evanston, I11., U.S.A.: Row, Peterson, 1956).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    John Maynard, Lord Keynes, “The General Theory of Employment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LI, February 1937.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R.S. Sayers, “Ricardo’s Views on Monetary Questions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LXVII, February 1953.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Knut Wickseil.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sir Dennis Robertson, “Mr. Keynes and the Rate of Interest,” in Essays in Monetary Theory (London: Staples, 1940).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.R. Hicks, “A Rehabilitation of ‘Classical’ Economics?” Economic Journal, Vol. LXVII, June 1957.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Don Patinkin, “Keynesian Economics Rehabilitated: a Rejoinder to Professor Hicks,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXIX, September 1959.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Franco Modigliani, “Liquidity Preference and the Theory of Interest and Money, Econometrica, Vol. XII, 1944.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F.H. Hahn, “The Rate of Interest and General Equilibrium Analysis,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXV, March 1955.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L.R. Klein, “Stock and Flow Analysis in Economics,” Econometrica, Vol. XVIII, July 1950.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    William Fellner and Harold M. Somers, “Stock and Flow Analysis: Comment,” Econometrica, Vol. XVIII, July 1950.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L.R. Klein, “Stock and Flow Analysis: Further Comment,” Econometrica, Vol. XVIII, July 1950.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karl Brunner, “Stock and Flow Analysis: Discussion,” Econometrica, Vol. XVIII, July 1950.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    William Fellner and Harold M. Somers, “Stock and Flow Analysis: Note on the Discussion,” Econometrica, Vol. XVIII, July 1950.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    William Fellner and Harold M. Somers, “Note on ‘Stocks’ and ‘Flows’ in Monetary Interest Theory,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. XXXI, May 1949.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Llewellyn Wright, “Sequence Analysis and the Theory of the Rate of Interest,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXV, December 1955.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Tew, “Sequence Analysis and the Theory of the Rate of Interest,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXVI, September 1956.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.W. Clower, “Productivity, Thrift and the Rate of Interest,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXIV, March 1954.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cliff L. Lloyd, “The Equivalence of the Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds Theories and the New Stock-flow Analysis,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XXVII, June 1960.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R.W. Clower and D.W. Bushaw, “Price Determination in a Stock-flow Economy,” Econometrica, Vol. XXII, July 1954.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Don Patinkin, “Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds: Stock and Flow Analysis,” Economica, Vol. XXV, November 1958.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hugh Rose, “The Rate of Interest and Walras’s Law,” Economica, Vol. XXVI, August 1959.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hugh Rose, “Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XXIV, February 1957.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    H.G. Johnson, “Some Cambridge Controversies in Monetary Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XIX, No. 49, 1951–52.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lawrence E. Fouraker, “The Cambridge Didactic Style,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. LXVI, February 1958.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gary S. Becker and William J. Baumol, “The Classical Monetary Theory: The Outcome of the Discussion,” Economica, Vol. XIX, November 1952.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Oscar Lange, “Say’s Law: A Restatement and a Criticism,” in Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics; in memory of Henry Schultz (O. Lange, F. Mclntye and T.O. Yntema, eds.) (Chicago University Press).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Don Patinkin, “The Indeterminacy of Absolute Prices in Classical Economic Theory,” Econometrica, Vol. XVII, January 1949.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Don Patinkin, “The Invalidity of Classical Monetary Theory,” Econometrica, Vol. XIX, April 1951.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Don Patinkin, “A Reconsideration of the General Equilibrium Theory of Money,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XVIII, 1949–50.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Don Patinkin, “Relative Prices, Say’s Law and the Demand for Money,” Econometrica, Vol. XVI, April 1948.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    E.J. Mishan, “A Fallacy in the Interpretation of the Cash Balance Effect,” Economica, Vol. XXV, May 1958.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    S.C. Tsiang, “Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds Theories, Multiplier and Velocity Analyses: a Synthesis,” American Economic Review, Vol. XLVI, September 1956.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    John Maynard, Lord Keynes, “Alternative Theories of the Rate of Interest,” Economic Journal, Vol. XLVII, June 1937.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Joan Robinson, The Rate of Interest and Other Essays (London: Macmillan, 1952).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kenneth E. Boulding, “M. Allais’ Theory of Interest,” Journal of Political Economics, Vol. LIX, February 1951.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    F.P.R. Brechling, “A Note on Bond Holding and the Liquidity Preference Theory of Interest,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XXIV, 1956–57.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Borje Kragh, “Two Liquidity Functions and the Rate of Interest: a Simple Dynamic Model,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XVII, 1949–50.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ralph Turvey, “Consistency and Consolidation in the Theory of Interest,” Economica, Vol. XXI, November 1954.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    N.J. Cunningham, “Business Investment and the Marginal Cost of Funds,” Metroeconomica, Vol. X, 1958.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    G. Clayton, “A Note on the Banking System’s Power to Lend,” Metroeconomica, Vol. VII, 1955.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    J.K. Eastham, “A Redefinition of the Boundary between Interest and Profit Theories,” in Dundee Economic Essays, J.K. Eastham, ed. (Dundee, 1955).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    M.D. Brockie and A.L. Grey, “The Marginal Efficiency of Capital and Investment Programming,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXVI, December 1956.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    W.H. White, “The Rate of Interest, the Marginal Efficiency of Capital and Investment Programming,” Economic Journal, Vol. LXVIII, March 1958.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    M.D. Brockie and A. Grey, “The Rate of Interest, the Marginal Efficiency of Capital and Investment Programming—A Rejoinder,” Economic Journal, LXIX, June 1959.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    J.E. Meade and P.W.S. Andrews, “Summary of Replies to Questions on Effects of Interest Rates,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 1, October 1938.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    G.L.S. Shackle, “Interest-rates and the Pace of Investment,” Economic Journal, Vol. LVI, March 1946.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    G.L.S. Shackle, “Business and Uncertainty,” Bankers’ Magazine, Vol. CLXXXIX, March 1960.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sir Roy Harrod, Towards a Dynamic Economics (London: Macmillan, 1948).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Royal Economic Society and the American Economic Association 1965

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. L. S. Shackle
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations